Reference Inaccuracies in Two Counseling Journals

Abstract

Article, book, and dissertation entries in reference lists in one volume year for two counseling journals were searched for accuracy. Among 2,388 verified references (85.7% of all cited references), 1,072 (44.9%) contained at least one error. Multiple errors in some references produced a total of 1,643 faults or errors. Data were tallied by reference segments (e.g., author, title). Findings paralleled data in five reports of similar research, principally for medical journals, published in the 1970s. The nature and frequencies of deviations from the original source were such that only some of the errors could be explained as typographical. At least with reference list preparation, writers in the counseling field, as well as elsewhere, seem to be taking insufficient care in their scholarly writing.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 10 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.